complaint·September 9, 2024

When interviewed, S1, S2, S3, and S4 all stated that all four of them were supervising the children and observed C1 and C2 fighting over toys. The children were redirected to different areas multiple times. After finishing the art project, C1 approached C2 again and tried to take the toy from C2. C2 unexpectedly bit C1 on the nose. Based on interviews conducted, the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Title 22, Division 12 Chapter 1Article 06. Continuing Requirements 101223 Personal Rights cited on the attached LIC9099D. Type A deficiency cited. Copy of report, 9099D, Appeal Rights, LIC9224 and Notice of Site visit issued. A copy of this report will be posted for 30 days, a copy given to the parents of each child enrolled and the parent of any child that enrolls for 12 months. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Felicia Torrence, Principal. When interviewed, S1, S2, S3, and S4 all stated that they were assigned a different classroom area to supervise the children. S2 redirected C1 a few times and brought C1 to the rug area. C1 kept taking toys out of C2's hands. S3 was at the table working on the spider project with the children one-on-one. It was C1's turn, so C1 went to the table to work on the project with S3. C1 finished and went to the science area where C2 was. C1 tried to take the toy out of C2's hand again. C2 unexpectedly bit C1's nose. The incident was so unexpected, they were all surprised at what happened The second allegation indicates that “Staff did not seek medical attention for child in a timely manner" Per the reporting party, the facility did not describe the severity of the injury, so the child was not picked up and did not receive timely medical attention. The child had two punctures on their nose. The emergency room doctor prescribed antibiotics to prevent infection. When interviewed, S1, S2, S3. S4, and S7 all stated that the child stopped crying minutes after the incident. The staff members cleaned C1's nose and applied first aid immediately. At first the injury did not seem bad. There was just some redness on the child's nose. As the day progressed, the injury got a little bit worse. The third allegation indicates that “Staff do not allow child's authorized representative to inspect the facility" When interviewed, all seven staff stated that parents are always welcome to visit the school at any time and the school always encourages the parents to be involved. Per S7, if it is a regular visit to observe the child’s classroom, they are open to freely enter however cannot interact or interrupt the class process. If they would like to meet with a teacher or staff member, they can schedule a time to do so. When interviewed, P1 and P2 stated that they are always open to visit and enter the school at any time. Per P1, although the outside gate is locked, they are always given access, if staff is outside they will open the gate or they can call for the gate to be opened and can go observe the children and are never denied entrance. P1 explained that they take their children to speech therapy and sometimes comes later or earlier and is always freely entering with no issues. Based on the investigation conducted by the Department, the allegations have been determined to be Unsubstantiated. A finding that the allegations are unsubstantiated means that although the allegations may have happened or is valid, there is not a preponderance of the evidence to prove that the allegations occurred. A notice of site visit was given and must remain posted for 30 days. Exit interview conducted and report was reviewed with Felicia Torrence, Principal.